RAM NARAIN Vs. VIDYA PRASAD AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for revision under Section 276 of the U.P. Tenancy Act arising out of a suit for a declaration under Section 59 of the U.P. Tenancy Act.

(2.) IT appears that the suit which has given rise to this application for revision was instituted by the Plaintiff against five persons for a declaration that the Defendants 1 to 3, who held out to be tenants of the landlords -Defendants Nos. 4 and 5 were not the tenants of the land in dispute and that the Plaintiff was the tenant of the land. The suit was contested and one of the grounds taken up in defence was that the suit was not within the cognizance of the Revenue Court. This plea found with the Assistant Collector and he directed the plaint to be returned to the Plaintiff for presentation to the proper Court. The Plaintiff then went up in appeal. The learned District Judge who heard the appeal, however, came to the conclusion that the order passed by the Assistant Collector was incorrect and that the suit was within the cognizance of the Revenue Court. The Defendant has now come up in revision under Section 276 of the U.P. Tenancy Act.

(3.) NO other point arises for determination. The application, therefore, fails and is dismissed with costs to the opposite party.